Going in to the BFI's LFF Surprise Film knowing the film from the night prior's paid for screenings people saw, I was prepared to witness another Michael Moore documentary, a man I've been a fan of since I started really getting into cinema, Bowling for Columbine, Sicko and Roger & Me are truly amazing and re-watchable documentaries, however Fahrenheit 9/11 was easily his worst, a multi-tonged approach to a subject the public was already more on Moore's side than ambivalent to and unfocussed so much that it jumped around on ideas that led nowhere to prove points that had limited impact.
Alas Capitalism, a film which was worked on as Fahrenheit 9/11 1/2 is like the original, a multi-tonged unfocussed approach to the banking crash that we're all anti-banks with already, and sadly whilst it's hysterical at times, it's also rather dull, overlong by at least 40 minutes and gives no resolution or attempts to break through to important people like Charlton Heston in Columbine. Instead Moore has times where he's recognised, and criticised for his films, and gets no where, slowly.
Do we care about people being thrown out of the house when only tears and religion are used to go into peoples' psyche, and how many American flags do you need to see in one film?
Sadly Moore's latest is exactly like this review, half-hearted and uninterested in it's subject matter, in fact distracted by everything else, and boring like fuck.
5/10
Monday, 26 October 2009
Friday, 23 October 2009
OH MY GOD OH MY GOD OH MY GOD, I saw it, it's alive, it's boring!
Blair Witch rocked the movie scene a decade ago, no budget camcorder horror about the power of suggestion that got everyone riled up. Then it subsided until 2007's [Rec] and subsequent, and shameless, English language remake Quarantine, add to that Cloverfield and Diary of the Dead, and forthcoming [Rec 2] (Quarantine 2: Quarantiner is out next year) and the also forthcoming The Fourth Kind and camcorder/true life horror is having another renaissance.
With this a no budget film form Sundance has been building buzz in recent months, about a couple who have a haunting in the house, using a camera to view it. Starting off normally, man turns on camera, abuses the camera by forcing it into conversation, awkwardly throws expositionary dialogue down and has two bad actors with no chemistry failing to make the one dimensional characters real like the film suggests, or even make the humour or scares work, it's a tired formula that you've seen time and time again, and here it's no different, it's painful, dull and slow.
Unlike the subtle trailer, the film goes for loud noises as jump scares to suggest forces of evil in the house, or if you're like me, loud noises outside that you just ignore. Or door movement that's clearly oh so freaking sinister.
I don't believe in the mumbo jumbo about ghosts 'n ghouls, demons and psychics, so maybe that's why the film didn't freak me out, send shivers down my spine or engage me at any point. Hell, from the beginning I knew which character I wanted to die, and which one was going to, they were not one and the same.
Horror is tough to do right, I recently caught Saw, a film people claimed to have revolutionised the horror genre. They don't notice it's purely a thriler, and the same is the case here, with it's tone it's slightly creepy, well, supposedly, but it's not about a horror stance, it's a thrill based film.
Alas it didn't work for me, but maybe you'll enjoy it. Anyway, horror still sucks as a whole, with only ambassador Raimi firing on all cylinders this year.
1/10
With this a no budget film form Sundance has been building buzz in recent months, about a couple who have a haunting in the house, using a camera to view it. Starting off normally, man turns on camera, abuses the camera by forcing it into conversation, awkwardly throws expositionary dialogue down and has two bad actors with no chemistry failing to make the one dimensional characters real like the film suggests, or even make the humour or scares work, it's a tired formula that you've seen time and time again, and here it's no different, it's painful, dull and slow.
Unlike the subtle trailer, the film goes for loud noises as jump scares to suggest forces of evil in the house, or if you're like me, loud noises outside that you just ignore. Or door movement that's clearly oh so freaking sinister.
I don't believe in the mumbo jumbo about ghosts 'n ghouls, demons and psychics, so maybe that's why the film didn't freak me out, send shivers down my spine or engage me at any point. Hell, from the beginning I knew which character I wanted to die, and which one was going to, they were not one and the same.
Horror is tough to do right, I recently caught Saw, a film people claimed to have revolutionised the horror genre. They don't notice it's purely a thriler, and the same is the case here, with it's tone it's slightly creepy, well, supposedly, but it's not about a horror stance, it's a thrill based film.
Alas it didn't work for me, but maybe you'll enjoy it. Anyway, horror still sucks as a whole, with only ambassador Raimi firing on all cylinders this year.
1/10
Wes Anderson, you know, for kids!
So here it is.
After years of work, and since Wes mentioned about Life Aquatic's stop motion fish that he wanted to work on a full feature in the style, he made it.
Filmed in the heart of the story, England, and featuring actual British actors as the humans, and Americans/Canadians for animals, we have Roald Dahl's The Fantastic Mr. Fox, as written by Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach. Now, to comprehend this film through my terms you need to understand where I'm coming from.
I've grown up from 10 to 19 on Anderson's portfolio, Rushmore, Tenenbaums, Life Aquatic, Darjeeling, Bottle Rocket, and as such have become one with his quirky, smart witty style of comedy, alongside Noah Baumbach, who I first became familiar with through Life Aquatic during a second viewing at 3 am, where the film really becomes pertinent. And subsequently second viewing of The Squid and The Whale made me adore that film, you can watch it again and again and each time focus one one character/team, brilliant. Margot at the Wedding was not the disaster everyone proclaimed, it was just even darker and leftfield than Squid.
So I'm up to snuff on these most awesome of indie movie makers, so imagine my surprise when I read the end credits and find it's not Anderson alone, ala Darjeeling, but with Baumbach that he co-wrote Mr. Fox, a film that is odd in all the wrong ways.
Yes the film looks great, has a homely charm indeed, but the characters are completely hollow and soulless, and with George Clooney and Meryl Streep's voices clearly too slick and American for the image, the film doesn't work on the vocal level. What about in humour? It's gonna be surreal, odd and yet human, right? No. No, instead of funny but true family problems we get 'cuss' as a running gag to replace fuck, shit and hell. To be fair it offers one of the film's two gags, in clustercuss.
But the only other gag is that Badger, Bill Murray in a very small role, has a mac behind him with post-its on it. That's it.
Who the film is made for is confusing as it's too wordy and complex for younger kids, not enough action and adventure for older kids, nothing vulgar for the teens and not smart enough for adults, they take their gags that aren't funny and instead of being patronising with them, run them into the ground or spell them out. It's not right, it's not what solid filmmaking and humour is about.
And the worst part about this film? It's 87 minutes and the film starts off feeling like it's going to have a lot of goings on, then about 2 reels in the main plot has been underway for ages, and the main plot is Mr. Fox wants to eat more chickens and feel rich, then he pisses off the farmers and puts all animals in the shit. And that's it, there's some unfunny, odd grenade and shooting sequences, but that's all the action, and the scope is so narrow it's almost no need to be animated, coulda just used real animals and got the same lack of emotions out of it.
I say this as an aficionado, the film is awful, truly awful, and it's sad that this is the case.
Avoid.
2/10
After years of work, and since Wes mentioned about Life Aquatic's stop motion fish that he wanted to work on a full feature in the style, he made it.
Filmed in the heart of the story, England, and featuring actual British actors as the humans, and Americans/Canadians for animals, we have Roald Dahl's The Fantastic Mr. Fox, as written by Wes Anderson and Noah Baumbach. Now, to comprehend this film through my terms you need to understand where I'm coming from.
I've grown up from 10 to 19 on Anderson's portfolio, Rushmore, Tenenbaums, Life Aquatic, Darjeeling, Bottle Rocket, and as such have become one with his quirky, smart witty style of comedy, alongside Noah Baumbach, who I first became familiar with through Life Aquatic during a second viewing at 3 am, where the film really becomes pertinent. And subsequently second viewing of The Squid and The Whale made me adore that film, you can watch it again and again and each time focus one one character/team, brilliant. Margot at the Wedding was not the disaster everyone proclaimed, it was just even darker and leftfield than Squid.
So I'm up to snuff on these most awesome of indie movie makers, so imagine my surprise when I read the end credits and find it's not Anderson alone, ala Darjeeling, but with Baumbach that he co-wrote Mr. Fox, a film that is odd in all the wrong ways.
Yes the film looks great, has a homely charm indeed, but the characters are completely hollow and soulless, and with George Clooney and Meryl Streep's voices clearly too slick and American for the image, the film doesn't work on the vocal level. What about in humour? It's gonna be surreal, odd and yet human, right? No. No, instead of funny but true family problems we get 'cuss' as a running gag to replace fuck, shit and hell. To be fair it offers one of the film's two gags, in clustercuss.
But the only other gag is that Badger, Bill Murray in a very small role, has a mac behind him with post-its on it. That's it.
Who the film is made for is confusing as it's too wordy and complex for younger kids, not enough action and adventure for older kids, nothing vulgar for the teens and not smart enough for adults, they take their gags that aren't funny and instead of being patronising with them, run them into the ground or spell them out. It's not right, it's not what solid filmmaking and humour is about.
And the worst part about this film? It's 87 minutes and the film starts off feeling like it's going to have a lot of goings on, then about 2 reels in the main plot has been underway for ages, and the main plot is Mr. Fox wants to eat more chickens and feel rich, then he pisses off the farmers and puts all animals in the shit. And that's it, there's some unfunny, odd grenade and shooting sequences, but that's all the action, and the scope is so narrow it's almost no need to be animated, coulda just used real animals and got the same lack of emotions out of it.
I say this as an aficionado, the film is awful, truly awful, and it's sad that this is the case.
Avoid.
2/10
Tuesday, 20 October 2009
The Contrabulous Fabtraption Of Professor Horatio Huffnagel
Terry Gilliam returns with a ridiculously entitled film of The Imaginarium Of Doctor Parnassus, wherein Christopher Plummer is a man made immortal by Tom Waits' devil, and beaten in a bet must give any 16 year old child to the Devil. He runs a small sideshow with friend Percy (Verne Troyer, also immortal it seems), his 15 year old daughter, Lily Cole, looking beautiful, and odd teenager Anton, Andrew Garfield. In the sideshow they offer people the chance to go through a mirror and into Parnassus' imagination, a weird brightly coloured CGI cartoon world that has all the delights you want, and the temptations placed by The Devil as well.
One day they see a man hanging under a bridge and bring him up, the man, Heath Ledger, has amnesia and is given the name George, until the papers fly by revealing he's front page news.
He works with the sideshow and rakes in money, but breaks rules, and ends up having a crush on Parnassus' daughter, who Anton has loved for ages, and it's a big ol' love triangle, as Parnassus is offered the chance to save his daughter by taking 5 souls before the Devil does. And so the film plays out.
Right there is about the first 45 minutes of the film, it takes time to understand what the hell is going on, so there it is, but surprisingly it doesn't annoy you, it's a wonder to enjoy the film play out, for a film where the trailers looked like abstract garbage it's a true delight to say the film in completion is absolutely hysterical, sometimes rather tense and almost consistently interesting, the film's final 15 minutes go on for a bit too long, but it's really interesting, especially when Heath Ledger goes through the mirror and becomes a new actor, a different face in his imagination.
The film is annoyingly good actually, it held my attention and appreciation throughout, though the CGI was off putting, the acting was hit and miss but the actors made the characters interesting and not simply one note, the direction is masterful and some of the designs are disturbingly surreal.
Overall Imaginarium is a real treat, a funny, smart and imaginative film that you should catch when possible.
9/10
One day they see a man hanging under a bridge and bring him up, the man, Heath Ledger, has amnesia and is given the name George, until the papers fly by revealing he's front page news.
He works with the sideshow and rakes in money, but breaks rules, and ends up having a crush on Parnassus' daughter, who Anton has loved for ages, and it's a big ol' love triangle, as Parnassus is offered the chance to save his daughter by taking 5 souls before the Devil does. And so the film plays out.
Right there is about the first 45 minutes of the film, it takes time to understand what the hell is going on, so there it is, but surprisingly it doesn't annoy you, it's a wonder to enjoy the film play out, for a film where the trailers looked like abstract garbage it's a true delight to say the film in completion is absolutely hysterical, sometimes rather tense and almost consistently interesting, the film's final 15 minutes go on for a bit too long, but it's really interesting, especially when Heath Ledger goes through the mirror and becomes a new actor, a different face in his imagination.
The film is annoyingly good actually, it held my attention and appreciation throughout, though the CGI was off putting, the acting was hit and miss but the actors made the characters interesting and not simply one note, the direction is masterful and some of the designs are disturbingly surreal.
Overall Imaginarium is a real treat, a funny, smart and imaginative film that you should catch when possible.
9/10
Ow My Bak 2!
Tony Jaa returns to his breakthrough performance in Ong Bak by making the sequel, entitled Ong Bak: The Beginning...
In this film we see Tony Jaa as a kid learning to fight so that he can kill the people who killed his parents, and learn about life along the way. From the same people who did the first they return with a lush looking sequel which has absolutely 0 originality in the plot and dialogue, subtitles badly coloured with white sometimes impossible to see because of the image behind it, fight sequences that are for the most part slow and uninviting and worst of all, there looks to be a lot more CGI in use this time, ruining the whole point of the original's gritty, simple, cheap style.
The sequel tries too hard to be a serious drama with action, involving a kid fighting a fucking crocodile, and it's ultimately a very boring, mundane, plain action drama with no elegance or interest, a complete and utter disappointment from Tony Jaa, who should do more modern day based action films, get away from the misplaced period settings most action titles abuse nowadays.
3/10
In this film we see Tony Jaa as a kid learning to fight so that he can kill the people who killed his parents, and learn about life along the way. From the same people who did the first they return with a lush looking sequel which has absolutely 0 originality in the plot and dialogue, subtitles badly coloured with white sometimes impossible to see because of the image behind it, fight sequences that are for the most part slow and uninviting and worst of all, there looks to be a lot more CGI in use this time, ruining the whole point of the original's gritty, simple, cheap style.
The sequel tries too hard to be a serious drama with action, involving a kid fighting a fucking crocodile, and it's ultimately a very boring, mundane, plain action drama with no elegance or interest, a complete and utter disappointment from Tony Jaa, who should do more modern day based action films, get away from the misplaced period settings most action titles abuse nowadays.
3/10
Friday, 16 October 2009
Happiness 2: Happinesser?
How does one summarise Life During Wartime for the uninitiated and sustain the shock of the original film's dark, twisted nature and taboo breaking subjects?
Todd Solondz has consistently made awkward, dark films that had amazingly funny moments that change tone to the dramatic, pushing melodramatic, so perfectly, and with Happiness he went all out, a child's attempts to masturbate all the way to the climax, his father's horrible fetish and how he goes about getting what he wants, a bright young woman who searches for happiness and ends up in a string of bad relationships, a poet who can't write as she's never been raped and a woman who murdered then cut up a doorman who raped her.
For a comedy drama it's particularly in depth and at times graphic, with many dark moments.
Fortunately this follow up doesn't go down those roads. The closest to a young boy and his dad talking about topics in a frank manner that is close to the bone if not past it is exchanged for a small conversation between Trish, now played by the wonderful Allison Janney, telling her young son Timmy, who was young in the first, now almost 13, about her date with a man getting her wet.
The film opens in a rather genius mode, almost shot for shot like the original, the opening titles with the white frames, the new Joy, a 40 year old married to an ex-con who reveals he still phones up random girls to get himself off, after giving Joy the same ashtray Jon Lovitz hands her in Happiness' opening sequence.
Hell, Lovitz's character offs himself in the first one but returns as a ghost, in the form of the magnificent Paul Reubans, to talk to Joy and try to convince her they are the perfect couple.
Ultimately though, Joy, who had a lot of the last film, is only handed a small segment of the 96 minute runtime, instead it's focussed on Trish moving on from Bill, now portrayed by Ciaran Hinds as a believable prison serving change from Dylan Baker's daring performance. Bill is out of prison and stalking the family to see what he is left to do, whilst Trish has found a new man, a sweet, kind but slightly older gentleman.
Timmy is gearing up for his Bar Mitzvah and suddenly learns his dad isn't dead like his mother told him, but actually still in prison, or he thinks he is even when he's just outside, and finds out what Bill did in the first film.
The film boils down to simple conversations, some very dark moments as always, and some out and out hysterical stuff, but given it's brief runtime in comparison to the 135 minute original the film seems slight, we go to places but it's more a Before Sunset glimpse than a Clerks II. full on here they are, and they are going on another journey. The acting is universally solid, never perfect, but never awful, the re-casting is odd but adds to the freedom Solondz gives the characters to change their lives instead of sticking in the rut of the original. Whilst the choice of Timmy looking oddly like Billy's friend Johnny, the first victim in the original, is rather distracting, to the point that a talk between College aged Billy, played by Linus from Fanboys, about Bonobos and incest seems rather, well, horrible.
For a film I was interested in from the get go but apprehensive about the approach, the tone and if Solondz would Crank 2 it and go for more taboos to break instead of character, I was relieved when it was all about real life people in situations, be it real or surreal, using humour and drama to perfection, it's a perfectly imperfect film that won't go down well in the mainstream, you need to see Happiness before seeing this film, and as there's still no distributor (A blank slate at the start of the film where it'd be) it'll be great to see the film get out to people.
And the HD will looks great, shot using Red cameras the depth and definition is remarkable, made me appreciate Solondz as a visual as well as witty writer/director.
If you can, I recommend seeing this film, it's funny, well made and rather brilliant in it's own way, just too darn short.
8/10
Todd Solondz has consistently made awkward, dark films that had amazingly funny moments that change tone to the dramatic, pushing melodramatic, so perfectly, and with Happiness he went all out, a child's attempts to masturbate all the way to the climax, his father's horrible fetish and how he goes about getting what he wants, a bright young woman who searches for happiness and ends up in a string of bad relationships, a poet who can't write as she's never been raped and a woman who murdered then cut up a doorman who raped her.
For a comedy drama it's particularly in depth and at times graphic, with many dark moments.
Fortunately this follow up doesn't go down those roads. The closest to a young boy and his dad talking about topics in a frank manner that is close to the bone if not past it is exchanged for a small conversation between Trish, now played by the wonderful Allison Janney, telling her young son Timmy, who was young in the first, now almost 13, about her date with a man getting her wet.
The film opens in a rather genius mode, almost shot for shot like the original, the opening titles with the white frames, the new Joy, a 40 year old married to an ex-con who reveals he still phones up random girls to get himself off, after giving Joy the same ashtray Jon Lovitz hands her in Happiness' opening sequence.
Hell, Lovitz's character offs himself in the first one but returns as a ghost, in the form of the magnificent Paul Reubans, to talk to Joy and try to convince her they are the perfect couple.
Ultimately though, Joy, who had a lot of the last film, is only handed a small segment of the 96 minute runtime, instead it's focussed on Trish moving on from Bill, now portrayed by Ciaran Hinds as a believable prison serving change from Dylan Baker's daring performance. Bill is out of prison and stalking the family to see what he is left to do, whilst Trish has found a new man, a sweet, kind but slightly older gentleman.
Timmy is gearing up for his Bar Mitzvah and suddenly learns his dad isn't dead like his mother told him, but actually still in prison, or he thinks he is even when he's just outside, and finds out what Bill did in the first film.
The film boils down to simple conversations, some very dark moments as always, and some out and out hysterical stuff, but given it's brief runtime in comparison to the 135 minute original the film seems slight, we go to places but it's more a Before Sunset glimpse than a Clerks II. full on here they are, and they are going on another journey. The acting is universally solid, never perfect, but never awful, the re-casting is odd but adds to the freedom Solondz gives the characters to change their lives instead of sticking in the rut of the original. Whilst the choice of Timmy looking oddly like Billy's friend Johnny, the first victim in the original, is rather distracting, to the point that a talk between College aged Billy, played by Linus from Fanboys, about Bonobos and incest seems rather, well, horrible.
For a film I was interested in from the get go but apprehensive about the approach, the tone and if Solondz would Crank 2 it and go for more taboos to break instead of character, I was relieved when it was all about real life people in situations, be it real or surreal, using humour and drama to perfection, it's a perfectly imperfect film that won't go down well in the mainstream, you need to see Happiness before seeing this film, and as there's still no distributor (A blank slate at the start of the film where it'd be) it'll be great to see the film get out to people.
And the HD will looks great, shot using Red cameras the depth and definition is remarkable, made me appreciate Solondz as a visual as well as witty writer/director.
If you can, I recommend seeing this film, it's funny, well made and rather brilliant in it's own way, just too darn short.
8/10
Tuesday, 13 October 2009
Hey, I'm Vince Vaughn, and I'm gonna bang your mom, chim chim cherroo.
Another year and another Vince Vaughn pic is released, subsequent classics include Wedding Crashers, The Break-Up,Fred Claus and Four Christmases. This year he's avoided going for another festive cheer comedy, and by festive cheer I mean lacking any warmth or humanity, and by comedy I mean Vince Vaughn spluttering American pop-culture quotes and fast food joints that only are in America to no avail.
Instead he's brought in heavyweights in the shape of Jason Bateman, Jon Faverau, Kristen Bell, Malin Akerman, Jean Reno, John Michael Higgins, Ken Jeong and the ever awesome Peter Serafinowictz (Serowikz to the BBC announcer who fucked his name up the other day)
Couples Retreat sees four couples go to paradise to have relationship counseling even though only one couple want to do it, and they all find, shock horror, they might not be where they should in their relationships. So Faverau and his wife go cheating, Faizon Love and his 2 week 20 year old girlfriend split up, Vince Vaughn and Malin Akerman contemplate what they are doing wrong and Kristen Bell and Jason Bateman argue and act like uptight twits.
Being that it's Hollywood the 4 relationships all have happy endings, Faizon gets back together with his wife, Bell and Bateman get back together even after Bell willingly leaps out of a boat to swim away from Bateman, marking the end of their relationship, even Faverau and his wife, who always cheat on each other, love each other.
Why? Because that makes everyone happy right?
Well, when a film offers not one but two scenes where a kid defecates in a bathroom showroom toilet, and has said kid and his brother do the 'go and have this holiday' speech for the parents, you question why you are sitting in this shitty cinema watching a horrible film like this.
Even Jean Reno, Ken Jeong, John Michael Higgins and Sir Peter Serafinowicz can't save this film solid heavy hitters and funny people, well, Jean Reno is more awesome than funny, but still.
The film reeks of desperation, and once again it's all about Vince Vaughn mugging for screentime to get 'laughs' which, you'll be glad to hear, weren't embraced by the audience.
This truly is as painful an experience as Vaughn's Christmas themed films, if you find anything funny in this film then you, sir, are an idiot.
1/10
Instead he's brought in heavyweights in the shape of Jason Bateman, Jon Faverau, Kristen Bell, Malin Akerman, Jean Reno, John Michael Higgins, Ken Jeong and the ever awesome Peter Serafinowictz (Serowikz to the BBC announcer who fucked his name up the other day)
Couples Retreat sees four couples go to paradise to have relationship counseling even though only one couple want to do it, and they all find, shock horror, they might not be where they should in their relationships. So Faverau and his wife go cheating, Faizon Love and his 2 week 20 year old girlfriend split up, Vince Vaughn and Malin Akerman contemplate what they are doing wrong and Kristen Bell and Jason Bateman argue and act like uptight twits.
Being that it's Hollywood the 4 relationships all have happy endings, Faizon gets back together with his wife, Bell and Bateman get back together even after Bell willingly leaps out of a boat to swim away from Bateman, marking the end of their relationship, even Faverau and his wife, who always cheat on each other, love each other.
Why? Because that makes everyone happy right?
Well, when a film offers not one but two scenes where a kid defecates in a bathroom showroom toilet, and has said kid and his brother do the 'go and have this holiday' speech for the parents, you question why you are sitting in this shitty cinema watching a horrible film like this.
Even Jean Reno, Ken Jeong, John Michael Higgins and Sir Peter Serafinowicz can't save this film solid heavy hitters and funny people, well, Jean Reno is more awesome than funny, but still.
The film reeks of desperation, and once again it's all about Vince Vaughn mugging for screentime to get 'laughs' which, you'll be glad to hear, weren't embraced by the audience.
This truly is as painful an experience as Vaughn's Christmas themed films, if you find anything funny in this film then you, sir, are an idiot.
1/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
